| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Alfred Speredelozzi wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Edward Welsh wrote:
> > I've been kicking an idea around for a while, and I wanted to put it out to the
> > community: I'd like to start an organization for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
> > transgendered (LGBT) AFOLs. A lavender brick society, if you like. >
> > -Teddy
>
> Wow, lots of controversy here, Teddy! I think this thread has really brought
> out the homophobic in many AFOLs. I mean, what are people talking about when
> they say they just want this site to be safe for kids? Aren't we a bunch of
> AFOLs? Doesn't the A stand for Adult? I know there are some underage people
> here, but really, what are they 15? Practically adult. We're not worried about
> the 5-6 year olds here are we? Can they even read?
>
> Anyway, I think the best point made so far is that Lugnet seems to have this
> offshoot set of newsgroups about political debates and computer geek
> discussions. Why exactly is that allowed here? Aren't we just here to talk
> about Lego? Well, the reason is clear, we are people and we want to talk about
> what interests us, with people who share our interests. So, we want Lego
> freindly geek discussions.
>
> I find myself agreeing with Larry's point of view on the issue, and I hope it
> holds. I don't exactly understand why someone wants a LGBT newsgroup, but maybe
> that is just because I am not in that crowd. However, if people do want it to
> exist, then it should exist. Lets exorcise these censorship thoughts from our
> minds, and just let people discuss things how they like. If it turns out to be
> popular, so be it. If it dies because its a stupid idea, so be it.
>
> Oh, and Tim, (and others) I think you are missing the point when you say that we
> are all just here to talk about Lego. We are, but many of us like to talk about
> it in different ways. Me, I really need a Lugnet.arguementative group. :) We
> segment the discussion--not to censor--but to allow people to discuss things in
> thier appropriate place. Honestly, if Teddy and others wanted to have a
> discussion about how it feels to be gay at a Lego club meeting should they do it
> in .general? Really, I think people would get annoyed.
>
> Teddy, I think you should start the Lavendar Brick society. Get some real
> members (sounds like you have 2-3 vocally interested, and that probably means
> you have several more lurkers). Form some sort of charter and then get a
> newsgroup in the .org domain. You don't have to do anything complicated like
> have meetings. Just look at SciBrick or ILTCO (ok, they have electronic
> meetings). Anyway, I just felt I had to respond because I think some people are
> letting homophobia cloud their judgement. Good Luck.
>
> (Oh, and I am sorry I missed your cookout last weekend. Someday I will get out
> to a Western NELUG meeting.)
>
> -Alfred
I just love this abuse of the term "homophobic" to anyone who disagrees with
whatever homosexuals propose to do (and Alfred, this does not mean I am saying
you a homosexual because I don't know and don't care). No other group exists -
religious, racial, gender or otherwise - that wants to paint anyone who
disagrees with them at any level, homophobic. No other group gets or deserves
such a carte blanche pass on anything they believe, espouse or desire to do.
And by the way, for those of you who like political correctness, if someone
actually WAS clinically homophobic, the types of sarcastic and biting responses
that are posted back to these people show that you're not above demeaning
someone who has a true pschological disorder - and how open-minded and
compassionate does that make you?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
207 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
